General Discussion

[mma75online]

1 hour ago, LongDukDong said:

Currently recovering from COVID.

 

[LongDukDong]

Thanks guys.  I seemed to be dating her for a while.

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

One of the side effects... LUNG DAMAGE.  Well, I got off easy as a friend .. coughed up some blood.  Not that either one of us ended up like this!

 

Spoiler

 

Well... if THAT was the case, what a way to go...    Fuck her brains out.

 

 

 

So... relaxing, chilling, doing little stuff.  Honestly, this week was the first week I even RAN Oblivion. 

 

Side note, I am touching up the Dukky Version of LoversHooker, and with good reason.

DID ANYONE REALIZE THAT WHEN YOU TOLD A GUY  "FRIENDS DON'T HAVE TO PAY," THEY NEVER SHOW UP AGAIN AND THERE'S NO HOOKER DIALOG TO GIVE THEM SEX WITHOUT PAYING?  Yeah, that's a major oops that was in the original.

 

TACKLED THAT.  Got an extra "Wanna have sex, Friend?" topic and made it so they can ask for sex free since they're a freebie friend.  And tested with the LoversSSP Patch for good measure.  So what's next?  Dialog expansion, even if same-sex so it's applicable to who's speaking to whom.  Sure, the 'Topics' are kinda rigid, but the replies can be fun to handle.

 

Examples:  6 categories.... 9 fun dialogs each per category.  These are FRIEND pickup lines:

Male Client to Male         So, what are the chances of my balls slappin’ your ass tonight?

Female Client to Male      My beaver is dying for some wood. Can you help?

Male Client to Female      I’m the doctor of love baby. Aren't you overdue for your meat injection?

Female Client to Female   Hey, girl, I am a bisexual. How about me buying you a drink, and then get sexual?

Either way Children Text   Want to see if someone gets pregnant? We can find out tonight.

General                            Fuck me if I’m wrong. But we have plans to have sex, right?

 

I plan to do this for the Non-Friend Clients, and expand everything else dialog-wise.  And, then adaption for TamagoClub as possible "NO FUCKIN PREGGERS" could be an issue, or if there's dialog for boffin pregnant ladies.  But that's a later concept.  Dialog is the fun thing now.  I can just sit back n relax without any coding for a change.

[fejeena]

Friends don't ask "how much"

If you use follow me and then say:

xLHFollowHere "Ok, this looks quiet enough." [DIAL:0200B9AA]

They start sex without paying. (dialog ends, sex starts )

Other NPC you have to ask "What are you in the mood for?"

 

Edit:

Friends never payed for sex in my game.  (only the blowjob right here 2 or 5 gold )

The first time I used the "friends don't have to pay" I thought it was a one time thing. I used it often so people like me... And then I realized that I didn't have many paying customers in this city anymore.

I miss a option:  "You are no longer my friend"  so the friend token will be removed and the NPC has to pay again. Yes the dialog should have a big loss of disposition.

Edited October 12, 2021 by fejeena

[LongDukDong]

1 hour ago, fejeena said:

Friends don't ask "how much"

Actually incorrect.  Or insofar as the LAPF 2.51 by Gaebrial is concerned, the last non-Dukky version.  You see, I found THIS bug.

 

Quote

 

; Check if punter is a friend
            if rPunter.GetItemCount xLHFriendRing > 0
                set sFollower to 2
            endif

 

; Report findings
            if sFollower == 2
                Let svDebug += "Friend."
;                DebugPrint "Hooker: Actor %i (%n) is a friend who doesn't have to pay. Lucky them." rPunter rPunter
                set sValidPunter to 0
            elseif sFollower == 1
                Let svDebug += "Follower."
;                DebugPrint "Hooker: Actor %i (%n) is a follower, so they can't make an approach. Unlucky." rPunter rPunter
                set sValidPunter to 0
            endif

        endif

 

; Valid punter found, so check if approach is made
        if sValidPunter == 1
            set sApproachChance to 0

 

 

 

Within the "Check if punter is a friend" section, the detection of the friend ring sets it to a follower rating of 2.  It could have been set to '1' and it would have made no difference.

 

The "Report Findings" section checks the rank of the follower, either 1 or 2.  However, both cases sets the sValidPunter flag to 0 

 

And the final part is the "Valid punter fround, so check if approach is made", which only works if the sValidPunter flag is set to 1.  As a Friend will always be set to 0, no friend will be part of the approach system, so they will never proposition you again.

 

That is the original code.  And clearly, it prevents Friends from any further approaches which I found extremely odd given the subject and the suggestion that they can have sex freely with the Hooker.  As such, it was this code which I had corrected to allow friends to return for second helpings.

 

Within the original, there is only one dialog for solicitations ("Want to have some fun? For a price...") , and it only suggests payment.  Whether or not you use the follow command, that you need to suggest payment for a friend who need not pay I found clearly unacceptable.  Approaching a friend who need not pay should not bring up the same topic that suggests payment for sex.  And for that, I made a secondary topic with some applicable touches.

 

So with the version I have in the works, the Friends can now approach you for freebies without issue.  And you can suggest giving them a thrill without need of payment.  And yes, the topic that suggests payment will not show up for the friends.

 

*   =   *   =   *

 

I have found that making multiple dialogs for a non-friend to solicit you for sex to be ... not as easy.  One could say that there's no easy way to get around one's asking someone for sex for money.  As a friend, the sky is more-or-less the limit.  I could have been as raunchy as I want.  But when not a friend? 

 

But I'm gonna see about other dialog in other sections.

 

*   =   *   =   *

 

1 hour ago, fejeena said:

They start sex without paying. (dialog ends, sex starts )

 

Ah, now THAT part is certainly true.  Make a friend (and don't say "Later, Friend" in the dialog options) and find a place to have sex, and it starts IMMEDIATELY.  I made sure that the variation where the hooker asks a friend if he/she wants a quickie includes the same reaction.

 

I was thinking about giving a little bit of .... randomness to that.  That is, perhaps a 10-20 percent chance of the friend asking you how you want it.

 

*   =   *   =   *

 

Oh, and GAWD, I am replacing the default GetRandomPercent commands with Rand 0 100.  While the WIKI suggests that values from GetRandomPercent are find except during ON LOAD procedures are less than random, I find it less random most any time.

 

Besides, Rand uses the Mersenne Twister algorithm, one of the most widely used  for generating random numbers, and was crafted after Oblivion was made.  Hehehe... which means it is both superior and newer than  GetRandomPercent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[fejeena]

Okay you use the "Want to have some fun? For a price..."  but the friend do not pay you.

Wrong dialog text . When you say "Ok, this looks quiet enough."  the friend have own dialogs (without a word about payment) and don't pay.

 

Only bad thing was that there was no free "blow me right here" option. (shit, I have not changed it in my version. I added two more ranks. 6 and 7. With rank 7 you are sex addicted and there is no dialog option "No thanks" . And if NPCs ask for an autograph or sex and it's too expensive you only have the option to reduce the prise (or do it for free) .

Yes can sometimes be a bit annoying if you just want to ask something and have to fuck first.

With rank 6 you have to reduce the price if an NPC does not want to pay, but you don't have to do it for free.

But I did only the female part/dialogs.

 

And I changed my Joburg esp , with Hooker rank 7 you can not refuse the joburg sex offers.  (But if they say "Want to watch me rub one out?  Tehehehe ..." you can say no )

Again I did only the female part/dialogs.

[LongDukDong]

Yes, I have a separate dialog for the 'Friends', so there's no ambiguity about pricing... or lack thereof.  But that's nice idea about free oral gratification. 

 

Oh, I'm also considering adding otherr INI value, one being a bonus/penalty entry for Friends for the 'approach' system.   That is, do Friends approach more often or less often?  It won't be dissimilar to the Male or Female options.  The other... is ... a secret. 

 

As to the two additional ranks, interesting. However, I will first work on the increase in dialog options followed up by the 'simple' Tamago dialog options I am considering:  (1) Will pregnancy halt anyone's interest or (2) will randy dialog about a knocked up hooker or femme client be generated.  Bet ya never thought about that.    Well, I guess I'd be the one to consider that option.

 

As to Rank 7 being the Nymphomania Galore, why NOT let the hooker choose whether to charge? Perhaps the Hooker finds that the client is HOT and is like,  "Fuck it.  Fuck me now!", or is like... "Er, okay... maybe 10 gold? How that sound?"  Player choice.  Well, I'm not gonna worry about that.  Well, not now.

 

Dude dialog?  Yeah, I kinda have issues.  ESPECIALLY if the hooker is a dude and a GUY picks them up.  Not my thing, but I try to give it a shot.   I had more fun for the 'Friends' dialog with Girl on Girl.    Friends can be raunchy, but nothing crass... or TOO crass.

 

 

*   =   *   =   *

 

Your sig.  You STILL wanna make your teddies pregnant?

 

Well, I was thinking....   Since before I started working on Tamago, Hakumen Oshite Mairu hid away two features/items to 'FREEZE' individual Tamago objects, or immediately join Egg/Sperm.  Of course, I do detailed examination.  The functions for the womb work when placed into a container... and only if the container is an 'Actor'. 

 

GET THE IDEA??? 

 

What if I set wombs up to work if the container is an 'Actor' or a MISC ITEM:  'Teddy'?  Now the only real issue is that the released egg derives its data from the owner of the container, and there is no 'race/HP/Hair/Gender' content for a miscellaneous item.  Currently, the easiest premise I have is that MISC item wombs will prevent egg release, and thus the item is actually an Incubator.  Otherwise....  HOLY HELL, HOW TO GET THE EGG DATA?

 

Like my thinking?  

[fejeena]

 

That wouldn't have happened to gummy  rubber bears.

 

[LongDukDong]

Errrr... um...  TamagoSetBody won't work.  Would need to make an alternate system to handle 'Items'...  On the other hand, that might be desired for a child incubator as I so described, eh?

 

What.  She's not lactating?  I don't see any teddy dribbles happening.

 

*   =   *   =   *

 

I just thought of a couple things that may be entertaining......

 

What if one could set it up (OPTIONALLY) that the entire HOOKER system will not/never function until one passes the basic course at the "School Of Advanced Prostitution"   I already have features in HOOKER to prevent 'HookerSystem' based actions for certain factions already.  And the option I suggest, I added it into the current incarnation of LST as it originally appeared when LST and BravilUnderground were one.... again optional only.

 

In addition, and sorta SOAP related, there are no 'Conversations' in Hooker.  Nothing that some person makes a sly comment about the hooker, whether HE has a nice package or she has a nice jiggle up there.  I just thought of the 'jiggle' comment from Bravil as Lara asks the player about comments thrown out about her.  But I digress.

 

Perhaps entertaining options may be made available if the hooker becomes more 'popular' among a faction or two.  The Dark Brotherhood has a thing for killing, maybe you can be their House Harlot. Nothing to interfere of course, merely a bonus to reaction and increase of interest due to popularity and willingness.

 

Ah, I have other ideas of course....

Back to adding more flavor-text to the system.

Edited October 13, 2021 by LongDukDong

[fejeena]

Not everyone wants to play  "School Of Advanced Prostitution" . It's a "only female" Mod.

For me OK I only play females ( That's why I only change the female parts in Mod modifications that I do not release )

 

I have LoversProstitue checked in some of my Mods ( the girls from LoversProstitue know when I am a hooker )  . And the money for services is now about the same in LoversProstitutes and Hookers .

 

The faction idea:

Some random greetings with a faction rank check. (in addition to the approach dialogues)

And "dark cults" like Dark Brotherhood  and Thieves' guild should know that you are a hooker much earlier than serious cults (maybe some members of other guilds know it too, but they don't talk about )

The mage guild should ignore it.

But Blackwood Company and Fighters Guild are okay ( maybe in guild houses with female boss nobody talks about whores )

 

So for some guilds the dialogs only with a GetInFaction (guild) and isMale/female check and other guilds with a GetIsID check if you don't want to be approached in all guild houses. And of course the hookers faction rank check, how well known you are.

And in the Thieves' guild you are a whore, that's your official profession. One is only secretly a thief. And maybe the player should give a discount for Thieves' guild members.

 

Perhaps all guild dialogs with asking for a discount .  "I heard you are a whore and we are friends after all, could you maybe give me a little discount? "  And player can say yes or no (with result : MODdisposition Player + or - )

 

-----------------------

 

And I can life without a Teddie Overpopulation.

 

But ....  creatures sex.  I use the vanilla bear ( only the brown bear ) with a teddie texture. I only have male bears, I still use LC2.

But with female bears....     female bears can bear Teddies. They do not give birth to small baby bears, they drop Teddies  which the player can find in the woods. (yes misc items )

 

Stupid idea.

.... but when the player finds a Teddie in the woods he/she knows bears live here .   A ranger recognizes the territory of bears based on the teddies.

 

[LongDukDong]

SOAP.  Yeah, that's why it's optional.  And with how I do stuff, also 'detectable.  Even if turned on in the INI, it won't operate unless Crowning would be working.  That's how I roll.

 

2 hours ago, fejeena said:

I have LoversProstitue checked in some of my Mods ( the girls from LoversProstitue know when I am a hooker )  . And the money for services is now about the same in LoversProstitutes and Hookers .

 

Actually, I had some fun with this.  I put in a condition where propositioning a prostitute (this and dark bloodline), and they say "We're in the same trade. Maybe you wanna try my wares?"... or something like that.

 

Regarding Factions, perhaps I should set up some stuff by way of conversations and not dialog... Perhaps more prone to have a 'trigger' in the Sanctuary to help kickstart the knowledge of you being a hooker than within the Mages guild.  Have a little fun with that while people in the city (moreso prolly in Bravil and Leyawiin) might start talking here and there.  NO such conversations allowed in CHORROL'S Fighter's guild for a while.  Check.  Forgot about that.  Well, I might wanna check responsibilities there. She may have low standards and might wanna re-experience a bit of the old in-and-out after all this time.

 

For all things, I tend to always like to make things optional, so Guild House approaches should be enabled/disabled and percentage based much like the other options like Guards.  Oh, if you check, approaching a guard and soliciting doesn't work.  Um, I made an INI switch so it 'may'.

 

HAHA!   You made me think, it'd be so much easier to be a member of the Thieves Guild as a hooker if the client would just "INVITE" me into the house for a good time first.  Pity you lead them rather than they lead you. Discounts?  A separate set of prices for the TG Teir...  hrm...  Not sure.

 

And yes, I was thinking about Guild-based dialog.  Certainly, a member of the mages guild would talk about making some magic while a member of the Fighter's guild would talk about polishing their swords.

 

*   =   *   =   *

 

So, your female bears do get knocked up?  I don't recall having a LoversEncounter that does creaturexcreature sex,
  (Gave me a damn idea, dammit.....  but make it only work if m/f, in heat, and same-race)

 

On the other hand, you're just placing 'teddies' in areas where bears would normally appear, eh?

 

*   =   *   =   *

 

Right now, my current status for my Hooker update is that I have the xLHMakeOffer and the last 4 price categories in the main quest to 'update' with a bit more dialog options.  Then it's the entire 'Lover Hooker Ranks' quest dialog to increase.

 

RE Choices Topic:  Got dialog about getting on all fours, violations, spreading those legs like butter, and oral phrases like getting some head or being eaten out.  Quadrupled the dialog lines in there.

 

RE Changing Mind Topics:  Might be called a bitch/bastard.  Might get a 'fucking you'll never forget'... n more.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 13, 2021 by LongDukDong

[LongDukDong]

I couldn't do much more enhancing the already existing dialog, the basic prices offered by LHCHOICE (ie 5,10,50,100), I could do ... well, nothing with.  And there wasn't too much done for the RANKS topic.  Fortunately the RANKS topic has a bit of variety (and now a touch more) than I worried about.

 

I decided to attack the .ini file.  Meh, I never touched it until now, and it ...  I like a certain structure.  In essence, I like it being IN a structure.  I got separations between categories like BASIC SYSTEMS, NPC APPROACH FACTORS, and SYSTEM DELAY FACTORS.  And lord knows, some of the entries didn't describe JACK SHIT!

 

For example, how did the CLOTHING system work?  Sure, it affects the chance of approach, but what was the necessary limits.  I had to look at the original code to determine the minimum clothing value to achieve in order to gain a bonus.

 

And how exactly did the AUDIENCE system work?  Well, it 'searched' for how many people know you're around... this happening under normal circumstances and NOT involving sex.  Well, the number of those knowing you... multiplied by THIS value... increases the chance of the player being raped if you ticked someone off if charging them too much.   The AUDIENCE value has nothing to do with having an audience during sex.

 

 

I guess now, my next step is what I basically said a while ago:

On 10/12/2021 at 4:03 PM, LongDukDong said:

And, then adaption for TamagoClub as possible "NO FUCKIN PREGGERS" could be an issue, or if there's dialog for boffin pregnant ladies. 

 

Yeah.  Add a simple check to count your 'TOKENS' to determine your state, and either 'BLOCK' fuckin' or have some entertaining reactions.

[fejeena]

The ini Descriptions are okay.  Of course, you don't know exactly how the calculation works.

Clothes, armor and gold setting I have always off / set to 0   ( Mod clothing often has no value or far too high value. And why should the value affect the chance? A sex-translucent dress with a value of 0 reduces the chance.  And with a 500 gold burqa you are surrounded by customers.    . The same with armor. Some Mod armor just covers the nipples and pubic...  why should it reduce the chance ? )

The leather armor I am currently wearing

Spoiler

You see the nipples and you see that I'm a futa.    And that reduces the price?  And a vanilla upper class dress would raise the price?  

That's why I set the clothes and armor settings always to 0 .

Unfortunately, it is impossible to make a "realistic" assessment of clothing and armor, are they sexy or not.  And what is sexy?

The only satisfactory rating would be one that each player makes himself.  A ini you can add in two (or more ) Categories the armor/clothes IDs/names that are sexy or not.

Raise or lower the price.  Or 4 Categories: "Very sey", "sexy", "not sexy", and "I can' see the player" (Burqa, plate armor, rolled up in a carpet,... )

All clothing and armor that are not in the ini do not change the calculation.

 

But that's too much work. First, to script it and second,  for the player to fill in the ini.

 

 

 

And the sAudienceFactor clearly says that it is for the approach, when you ask for gold. Badly chosen name.

It is the "addon" for  sRapeAllowed.

sRapeAllowed Yes/No

Then sAudienceFactor when it comes to rape.   Discontent/displeased setting would be a better name.  ( Or "Not happy with the offer" setting )

 

----------

There are many people who love to fuck pregnant women...  and others who don't like it at all .

random chance  reactions woold be the best, from "Yuck, go away! " to "Wow, you are so sexy "

[LongDukDong]

Yeah, there can be issues with how one interprets the Clothing and Armor.  I think the basic system was designed with Vanilla clothing in mind.  I have a sexy and revealing armor that is 5000 gold as well, though the in-system cap is 500.  And if you have armor turned on and are only wearing 'Clothing', you get an armor penalty for 0 armor value.  But still, this is the original system.  I'm not touching the base mechanics that was designed.  I'm only 'defining' it better in the INI file so the player becomes aware.  Heck, my descriptions point out that 100gp costs is the mid-range.  Below that is penalty, above that is bonus.

 

STILL, the pricier the clothes makes the hooker?  Does that mean Countess Alessia Caro's a prostitute?  Um... lemme pick another person.   Still, maybe some prossy clothes might be a good idea.

 

*   =   *   =   *

 

The Audience feature was badly written.  The audience value has nothing to do in scripts like 'xlHookerCalcGold' (aka Calculated Gold Chance), and the value is only used within the xlHookerDetect script which is only called by the xlHookerCalcRape script.  So the more witnesses when he can't pay makes him more enraged?  Sheesh...

 

*   =   *   =   *

 

Besides randomness, perhaps a combo mix of random and the Responsibility AI.  And this combined with one more token to use to determine pregger love.  If the person has 0 tokens, determine preggo love and set tokens.  1 token means hell no and 2 means sure, let's do it!  That way, NPCs may be random at start, but constant in their preference when it's been determined.

 

Spoiler

Couldn't find a decently drawn/animated one so...

 

 

Okay, marginally knocked up...

 

 

 

 

The script would actually be easy to determine pregnancy:  Get the Target, Exit if Tamago not loaded.  Count the number of WombState tokens.  Return 1 for the dialog if preggers, 0 if not preggers. Simple.  I could do that for other conditions like if a woman is in heat.

 

an

Edited October 15, 2021 by LongDukDong
Done editing

[fejeena]

I interpret the armor setting differently.

When you wear armor you get a penalty, without armor no penalty.

Nothing about value in the ini text.  ( or is there a cost check in the scripts? )

 

Set to 1 to reduce the calculated chance for an NPC to approach the player if the player has any armor equipped. Does not include shields unless a one-handed weapon is also equipped.

 

Player in armor = looks like a tin can = add a penalty.

 

Player wears clothes, no matter what they look like = Player gets a bonus if they are expensive.

 

Player with plate armor and full helmet but with shoes for 500 gold = The penalty and the bonus cancel each other out.

[LongDukDong]

Yes, there is actually a cost check in the scripts for Armor, roughly similar to that for the clothing.  And shoot, maybe I looked and saw a + and - wrong.  I'll doublecheck when I get to it.

 

PREGGER CHECK!

 

Easy per-say, but the test FOR pregnancy cannot occur in the topics.  It must be done prior to getting to the dialog.

 

Basically, the player is checked per cycle of the xlHookerMain quest.  It's no biggie.  The default setting for the quest is every 5 seconds and shouldn't cause any issue.

 

And the HookerPOSE quest updates kinda fast.  But I have a simple and a 'crosshairs' system that works fine. It currently tags NPCs if the NPC is a prostitute (LoversProstitute, Dark Bloodline) and prevents 'action'.  Easy enough to slip the same script in there to flag the NPC as preggers or not.

 

Then I just do some adjustments to the greetings and offer topics.  This followed by an INI section for Tamago so there's a set of on/off switches.

 

 

EDIT:

 

The Increase in Armor DOES actually affect or reduce the chance, and it is actually based on the value of your armor.  Higher valued armor makes the Client more impressed while cheap scraps make them think that you're some kind of low-life.  And this is the Clothing/Armor code

 

            ; Approach chance is modified by clothing value
            ; If armor coverage is applied, use armor % to modify clothing value
            if sClothFlag == 1
                Let sClothValue := Player.GetClothingValue
                if sArmorFlag == 1
                    Let sArmorCoverage := Call xlHookerGetArmor
                    Let sClothValue := (sClothValue * sArmorCoverage) / 100.0
                endif
                Let sApproachChance := (sApproachChance * sClothValue) / 100.0
                Let svDebug += sv_Construct "Cloth (%.0f) Appr= (%.0f) " sClothValue sApproachChance
;                DebugPrint "Hooker: Clothing value applied %.0f, approach is now %.0f." sClothValue sApproachChance
            endif

 

 

As you can see, they acquire the value of the armor and then multiply the cloth value by it and then divide by 100.  In essence, setting it up so a cumulative armor value of 101 or higher increases, less than 100 decreases.   This division by 100 is later performed on the entire cloth value system as well, so a cumulative cloth value's center is 100 gold.

 

 

 

Edited October 15, 2021 by LongDukDong

[fejeena]

???? I see no armor value

 

In the  xlHookerGetArmor script you get a +xx or -xx if you wear armor part (head,hand,upper, lower, foot, shield )

But i do not understand the calculation

 

this at the end of the script is what you use in the  xlHookerMainScr

 

    if unarmoredPart < 0
      set unarmoredPart to 0
    endif

    SetFunctionValue unarmoredPart

 

But if unarmoredPart is 0  ?????

 

  Let sArmorCoverage := Call xlHookerGetArmor  ; will get a 0

     Let sClothValue := (sClothValue * sArmorCoverage) / 100.0

   Let sClothValue := (sClothValue (of any value)    *    sArmorCoverage  (that is 0 ) / 100.0  will be always a 0   !!!!   Mathematics. something x 0 = 0

 

And if you wear only armor you have no cloth so the sClothValue = 0.  Or you have all clothes with gold value 0

Then you have

Let sClothValue := ( 0 * 0 ) / 100.0   =  0  ! ! !

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

And I tried to check it with console...

But my sApproachChance is alway 100  with cloth flag and armor flag set to 0 or 1 in the ini.

 

With cloth flag and armor flag set to1 in the ini  I see in the console that they are set to 1 ( That part works )

But  sClothValue  and  sArmorCoverage are always 0

Only clothes, and one with value 15000 gold the sClothValue is 0

Only armor or mixed with clothes the sArmorCoverage is always 0

 

I was in walk mode ( = Approach ) and NPC was nearby  so the calculation should be running . . . but still sClothValue  and  sArmorCoverage = 0

I talk o an NPC, ask if he wants sex  and checked the console and still 0

 

----------------

Result:  I always had cloth flag and armor flag in the ini at 0    and if I set it to 1 there is no differens in any calculations .

Always sClothValue  and  sArmorCoverage =  0 and  sApproachChance  = 100

 

 

[LongDukDong]

Yes, you receive 10 for any heavy or light armor you have for different sections, otherwise each specific section is -10  OR moreso for the cuirass and greaves.

 

Assuming you have a full suit, you have a lot more than 50 being added here.  However, the option/setting for armor in the INI file is contingent upon that the hooker DOES wear armor, or suffer a penalty.  And clearly, no armor is a major penalty indeed.

 

*   =   *   =   *

 

I added an extra tweak...  Bonus/penalty to approach for 'FRIENDS'  It's no big deal at all and only needed a few lines.  And I've already implemented the option to 'halt' approaches if the player (or the NPC) is pregnant.  Optional as stated.  The test was TOO easy.

Adding dialog when either the player or NPC is pregnant, or ensuring only normal dialog is used if no one's knocked up... Takes a little while.  BUT it is not necessary to block any pregger dialog in the GREETINGS as that's really if an approach was made.  And that's covered by the approach system.

 

Where it is specifically needed is the Make Offer sections, preventing the player from offering IF pregnant and offering during preggers is off.  Otherwise, I have both pregger-based dialog (player and NPC) and nominal dialog when no one's preggy. 

 

Actual mechanics first, then flavor-text to follow.

 

 

How I have the INI for the Clothing, Armor, etc.

Spoiler

; CLOTHING
; --------
; This setting determines if the combined value of the player's clothing affects
; the calculated chance  for an NPC's chance of approach.  A cumulative clothing
; value greater than 100 will increase this chance, otherwise any combined value
; below 100 will decrease the chance of an NPC's approach.
; DEFAULT: 1 (Valid settings: 0=Off/1=On)
;
  set xlHookerMain.sClothFlag to 1

 

; ARMOR
; -----
; This setting determines if the combined value of the player's armor will alter
; or permit the value  of the player's clothing  to affect  the NPC's chance  of
; approach. Each armor piece (Helmet, Greaves, etc), applies a bonus score while
; not wearing an armor piece applies a penalty score. A returned score may be as
; 110 or as low as 0.  Please be aware  that the returned armor score  is multi-
; plied to the clothing score,  so setting one to require armor and not have any
; will nullify your clothing score entirely. To achieve the higher score of 110,
; one would need to have a shield equipped.  However, the shield is only counted
; in calculations if a one-handed weapon is also equipped.
; DEFAULT: 1 (Valid settings: 0=Off/1=On)
;
  set xlHookerMain.sArmorFlag to 1

 

; GOLD CARRIED
; ------------
; This setting determines  if the amount of gold the NPC is carrying affects the
; chance of making an approach,  and to reduce the gold carried  by a successful
; negotiation with the player/hooker for sex. An NPC must carry at least 10 gold
; for an approach to be possible, and gold values higher than 500 are treated as
; 500 for purposes of approaches.
; DEFAULT: 1 (Valid settings: 0=Off/1=On)
;
  set xlHookerMain.sGoldFlag to 1

 

 

; EVENING TIME PREFERENCE
; -----------------------
; This setting determines if approaches occur more often in the evening, between
; the hours of 6pm to midnight (or 20:00 and 00:00). The value greatly increases
; the chance of an NPC's approach during those hours.
; DEFAULT: 1 (Valid settings: 0=Off/1=On)
;
  set xlHookerMain.sTimeFlag to 1

Long winded... but certainly more explanatory than before.

 

[fejeena]

Then the armor flag / calculation makes no sense to me.

Player in full armor- plate armor with helmet. looks like a tin can.  And if you use vanilla ( no sex mesh replacer) you can't even see her/his face and Body contours.

This setting makes absolutely no sense,    as does the value of the clothes. 

 

Sexy Player in armor can barely handle all the approaches .

Spoiler

 

 

Sexy Player in 500 gold clothes can barely handle all the approaches.

Spoiler

 

 

Okay these two settings will never be set to 1.

 

EDIT:

I have to change all the clothes in LoversProstitute.  The girls are given clothes in which one cannot even recognize the race. If customers don't want to see what they are paying for or they like surprises, then they get what they want. 

 

 

Edited October 17, 2021 by fejeena

[LongDukDong]

I am assuming that the original premise for the CLOTHES feature was that the higher value of clothes worn would show you were of a higher status and not some street trash. And thus more attractive to the clientele.

 

And I am assuming that the ARMOR system, if engaged, was to be some sort of ... possible... penalty system?  The only true way to have your clothing modifier not penalized was to have as much armor worn, and only if a full set with sword/shield combo to be above the 100 mark.  Not saying I like it... but that's how it appears to operate.  HOWEVER, at least it only affects the clothes (and one could say higher-class' status'?) modifier.

 

 

8 hours ago, fejeena said:

I have to change all the clothes in LoversProstitute.  The girls are given clothes in which one cannot even recognize the race. If customers don't want to see what they are paying for or they like surprises, then they get what they want. 

 

Hm.  I don't know if I did or didn't make this suggestion a few days ago. *I don't feel like searching* But perhaps I might want to add some entertaining clothes fit for the ladies and give a variety of prices...  nice and appealing garments.  Nothing TOO outrageous, but something that says "Hey, you!  Wanna cum over here?"

[fejeena]

If you can't find clothes I've already found some for my prostitutes.

 

Set it to 100 gold  and the customers get what they want and like.  

Spoiler

My new sexy whores.    Well, the clothes show a little too much skin but hopefully the customers like it anyway.   

 

 

 

[LongDukDong]

I was thinking of something more silks and revealing.

WIP:   Dialog options when offering Friends Sex. with and without pregnancy... this with an Enable/Disable function.

 

And hey?  You can offer Friends ORAL!  Yep, that was a good idea.  Friends should have fun options.  I mean, they're FRIENDS, right?  Not sure about the dialog when offering to eat out a pregnant lady....?  I just might make it enabled/disabled only.  Topics for this, since not asking for money, has changed entertainingly.

[fejeena]

Silky?   Sheer clothes?      That's not sexy!      And why silk?  Only the value is decisive.  You could be wrapped in toilet paper ( very expensive and rare! )

Sheer clothes =  big approach penalty 

[LongDukDong]

Well, after figuring out epic sexy clothing, we could always use LoversHooker as a 'BASE' for a 'Priestesses of Dibella' mod. 

[fejeena]

There was a nice Priestess of Dibella Mod.  With Sex like Gweden brothel ( no sex animations , only talk about sex )

Warrior Nuns (Areala)   , disappeared several years ago at Nexus.

Only 3 nuns and limited to one location. Was one of the first mods I used to learn how to add lovers sex to other mods.

 

The original Mod clothes. Completely non-sexy, because value 0

Spoiler

 

[LongDukDong]

Nuns... with swords?  I guess that would make them Nunjas?

 

 

CONFIRMING:  The "Make-Offer" dialog now recognizes the ability to allow sex offers properly, allowing sex if player, npc or neither preggers if the AllowPregOffer switch is on, and ONLY allow sex if neither preggers if switch is off.  Gonna be entertaining to 'expand' on the characters who are expanding.  But fully possible. 

 

Slow and sure, eh?